I want it to superimpose a black square in front of people's faces so I don't have to look at the farkers unless I really want to. Better yet, superimpose Mila Jovovich's face over all the women. Okay, men too. I'm fair.

Say what you will, but for us Glassers who also happen to own 3d printers (MakerBot) especially, this is a badass time to be alive. As long as there's no fancy circuitry or function needed, we can make anything we could possibly need for our ocular peripheral.

croesius:Say what you will, but for us Glassers who also happen to own 3d printers (MakerBot) especially, this is a badass time to be alive. As long as there's no fancy circuitry or function needed, we can make anything we could possibly need for our ocular peripheral.

It's "badass" to be able to print tiny little flowerpots to mount on your face computers?

I'd like Google Glass better if you didn't wear it on your face. Like, if I could just keep it in my pocket and take it out only when I actually wanted to engage with it, that'd be awesome.

In all seriousness, aside from having a convenient way to record video or snap a picture, I still don't "get" Google Glass. Then again, I don't "get" why people are conditioned to get their phone out every time they hear a new message ding.

Mr. Pokeylope:croesius: Say what you will, but for us Glassers who also happen to own 3d printers (MakerBot) especially, this is a badass time to be alive. As long as there's no fancy circuitry or function needed, we can make anything we could possibly need for our ocular peripheral.

It's "badass" to be able to print tiny little flowerpots to mount on your face computers?

also... "glassers"?

He's a man who defines himself on consumer choices and brand identity. He needs some sort of nickname to feel less shallow?

Also, uh, you might look up 'glassed' and 'glassing' the sex act. It makes you look like someone who enjoys shiatting on tables for men, or someone who enjoys hitting or being hit with bottles.

I don't know why you can't view pr0n on it, but some articles have been out lately with the message that making pr0n while wearing google glass is the next "big thing".

Hmmm if they get past the "view" part and head strait into "group sex video chat streaming", this........could work. Basically couples each wearing the glasses all farking at home and streaming the feed to other couples who are also viewing and streaming their own farking to each other maybe 20 or so couples doing it at once and you can switch and view any couple you want.

I'm betting somebody somewhere is already making a fake item that you hang on the temple piece of your regular glasses that makes it look like you have GG. For those who want to look the part but can't afford/don't want the real thing. Or just enjoy being rousted by the FBI in theaters.

This is a trial version; a proof of concept so that when it does ramp up to full-scale production, there will be defined use cases and a niche carved out for Glass. As opposed to a smartphone - when they started, were there millions of user-created applications exploring the full functionality and capability of the device, or did we have to wait a few years?

croesius:Say what you will, but for us Glassers who also happen to own 3d printers (MakerBot) especially, this is a badass time to be alive. As long as there's no fancy circuitry or function needed, we can make anything we could possibly need for our ocular peripheral.

Farker please. You KNOW that the official term is "Glasshole" and has been for some time now. Don't go trying to create a fake term. If you're a proud glasshole, be a proud glasshole.

Besides, the Ira Glass Fan Club would probably sue you.

/monocle on a stick/you know you can't even FOLD the damn thing? Like every other pair of glasses ever?/Google couldn't afford two hinges/but you go on with your badass glasshole 3d printing self

I can see uses for it. Out on a bike ride for example or taking video of skiing with my kids without having to mount something to my helmet. Lotta hate in this thread. I would probably opt for something like this though:

jst3p:Out on a bike ride for example or taking video of skiing with my kids without having to mount something to my helmet

But that's not really what it's for- it's a display that also records video. To me, the problem is the display (I'm not sold on the idea of a head-mounted camera, either- I'd rather have a more stable platform).

t3knomanser:jst3p: Out on a bike ride for example or taking video of skiing with my kids without having to mount something to my helmet

But that's not really what it's for- it's a display that also records video. To me, the problem is the display (I'm not sold on the idea of a head-mounted camera, either- I'd rather have a more stable platform).

First of all who are you to tell me what I buy it for? But for biking I wasn't thinking video. I would love this:

jst3p:t3knomanser: jst3p: Out on a bike ride for example or taking video of skiing with my kids without having to mount something to my helmet

But that's not really what it's for- it's a display that also records video. To me, the problem is the display (I'm not sold on the idea of a head-mounted camera, either- I'd rather have a more stable platform).

First of all who are you to tell me what I buy it for? But for biking I wasn't thinking video. I would love this:

I wasn't talking about buying. I was talking about design. It is not designed, and would likely be unsuitable for the use-case you describe. Second, software-wise, it's not suitable for your second use-case- it's built around sending cards to the display. Cards have very limited dynamism. The display is emphatically not designed around being an "always on" display.

You can use a hammer to drive in screws, and no one is going to stop you. But hammers are not designed for that, nor are screws. The difference here is that hammers have a clear purpose- Glass doesn't.

t3knomanser:Then again, I don't "get" why people are conditioned to get their phone out every time they hear a new message ding.

You call yourself t3knomanser, yet you don't get why people answer their phone when they get a text or email?

I bet you don't "get" why people answer it when it rings and someone is calling, either. Texts, the way the people I know use them, are as important as phone calls. I respond in a timely manner to the best of my ability, and I expect the same from others. For comparison, I would rather someone who has a quick question to ask me send a text "hey Smack, where are those speakers, I can't find them anywhere" as opposed to call and initiate a conversation. Texting is also preferable for passing information about dates/times of appointments. If you would answer the phone for someone to call you and say when something is happening, why wouldn't you read the text?

Plus, texts are more multi-taskable than talking on the phone, with the obvious exception of operating heavy machinery.

/or did your whole post woosh right over me? Or did you just mean ding to refer to crap like facebook updates, which, afaik as a non-user, are largely not time sensitive?

t3knomanser:jst3p: First of all who are you to tell me what I buy it for?

I wasn't talking about buying. I was talking about design. It is not designed, and would likely be unsuitable for the use-case you describe. Second, software-wise, it's not suitable for your second use-case- it's built around sending cards to the display. Cards have very limited dynamism. The display is emphatically not designed around being an "always on" display.

You can use a hammer to drive in screws, and no one is going to stop you. But hammers are not designed for that, nor are screws. The difference here is that hammers have a clear purpose- Glass doesn't.

If it can do turn by turn directions I am sure it could have the information I want when I want it. It doesn't have to be dynamic to be useful, one doesn't stare at these apps while biking or skiing. You lack imagination.

Smackledorfer:Texting is also preferable for passing information about dates/times of appointments.

Is it? I prefer email for that. .ics files are nice.

I have to be honest, I sort of skipped the whole texting thing. I don't have a texting plan, and any texts I do send I do through Google Voice, which I usually do from a computer. I prefer email, but I have never viewed email as a timely thing- emails sit and wait until I get to them.

t3knomanser:Smackledorfer: Texting is also preferable for passing information about dates/times of appointments.

Is it? I prefer email for that. .ics files are nice.

I have to be honest, I sort of skipped the whole texting thing. I don't have a texting plan, and any texts I do send I do through Google Voice, which I usually do from a computer. I prefer email, but I have never viewed email as a timely thing- emails sit and wait until I get to them.

More people have my phone number than my email address. For some situations texting is superior. I agree with Smackledorferyou have chosen an odd moniker for yourself.

The face-mounted display poses a lot of technical challenges, let's just drop it entirely. Let's do a surface-projected display that can display at varying ranges. More power, but more utility. Since we're ditching the FMD, however, we can change the form factor. We can make the device larger, and place it elsewhere- like on the shoulder. This creates a better video platform, too. With some gaze-tracking, we can go back to the FMD by putting a target over the eyes. The advantage here is that this doesn't require any specially compatible frames- it's now just a standard, normal HUD.